YOURSAY | Wrong to give perks to VVIP convicts

 

YOURSAY | ‘Disgusting to see convicted ex-PM have right of way over common folks.’

IGP: Convicted ex-PMs can have escorts until appeal process exhausted

Dr Raman Letchumanan: "Should former prime ministers be convicted for a crime, their police escort privileges will remain until they have exhausted the appeal process," inspector-general of police (IGP) Acryl Sani Abdullah Sani claimed.

Reading further on, "Section 21 of the Members of Parliament (Remuneration) Act 1980 states that former prime ministers are entitled to allowances and privileges as determined by the cabinet."

So did the cabinet decide to provide former premier Najib Abdul Razak the privileges after he was convicted by the High Court? Or was there a standing cabinet directive that convicted PMs can have the privileges until they exhaust their appeal?

Najib reportedly withdrew former PM Dr Mahathir Mohamad's security and escort services because the latter was speaking and writing against the former and his government. So it seems there is no such strict standing directive from the cabinet, otherwise Najib would not have done that to Mahathir.

It seems rules are made by the sitting PM and his government at their whims and fancy, especially targeting opponents.

Once a person is convicted, the burden of proof of innocence falls on the convict. That is why in the appeal process, the convict is the appellant/plaintiff.

A normal person would have been consigned to prison for such a heavy jail sentence and fine unless there are extenuating circumstances.

In any case, with questionable verdicts lately, I hope there emerges some clarity, transparency and consistency in our justice system and enforcement.

Vijay47: Please clear some doubts for me, Acryl Sani. As IGP, you are expected to know the law, at least a smattering of it even if not as well as Najib’s lawyer Muhammad Shafee Abdullah.

Your generosity towards prime ministers would withstand challenge if it was related to “such period as the accused undergoes trial”. But once the hearing ends and should the court find the accused guilty, the criminal loses all privileges.

In case you don’t know, Najib has been found guilty and he is now a convicted criminal. Yes, he may pursue any length of appeal as his and his counsel’s imagination may devise, he may make as many trips to Singapore and Malacca as he wishes, but he remains a convicted criminal.

The court’s determination stands supreme. But by your strange reasoning, any criminal who has filed an appeal need not pay for his crime “in the meantime”.

However, should Najib’s appeal succeed, his sorry slate will be wiped clean and he regains whatever standing he may once have enjoyed. At that point, Acryl, you are most welcome to restore all his lost glory and benefits, including the impressive police escorts with sirens wailing.

I am tickled that you referred to “prime ministers making an appeal” in the plural. Are you hinting that a few more may be hauled before the courts? Not that some don’t deserve just desserts.

Oct: Technically, the police are right to provide escort to a convicted felon as it was based on established rules but morally, it is wrong not to correct an obvious mistake.

The government must take positive action to correct an oversight. There are no such provisions anywhere in the world where a convicted felon is accorded so much privileges as Najib.

Najib’s appeal is taking a long time and subsequent appeals can still be made. If each appeal takes five years or more, he won't go to jail in his lifetime.

In the meantime, he gets to enjoy his pension, pay, allowances and perks as long as he has not exhausted his appeals. This is making a mockery of our judicial system. Do ordinary convicts enjoy similar benefits?

It seems nobody dares to move against him for fear of reprisals. There is a high possibility that Najib can return as PM and all his cases dropped. He may even earn a pardon to give him a clean slate. Malaysia is a land of endless possibilities.

OrangePanther1466: IGP, this practice is grossly wrong. You are sending the wrong message that privileges are still intact even though one has been convicted of a crime.

The standard operating procedure (SOP) should be that once you are convicted of a crime, you immediately lose all your privileges. These privileges can be restored if you are successful in your appeal against your conviction.

You cannot accord convicts privileges over the common public persons. It's ludicrous and a clear abuse. I am aware that the police have not had the experience of dealing with a convicted VVIP so this is a good opportunity to do it right.

It's disgusting to see the convicted former PM having the right of way over the common folks. He is proven to have stolen our money and yet he gets these privileges and personal protection. Use your common sense, please.

GrayDove8171: The court has already found him guilty. If by appealing means that he is still deemed innocent, then shouldn't you accord the same assumption to all convicts? So, if any inmates appeal their sentencing, would you allow them to walk freely out of jail?

Instead of setting the precedents for more convicted former PMs in the future to demand such perks, you should instead make a shining example of the current one by revoking all his police outrider privileges.

Bruclax: How do we teach the young about the evils of corruption, IGP? You say that a convict enjoys all privileges until he exhausts the appeal process.

The laws in the country are meant to teach its citizens that crime does not pay. Here your rules seem to prove crime does pay. If one is deemed innocent till proven guilty, does it not mean guilty till proven innocent?

Furthermore, there are significant double standards here. Government officials found guilty have their salaries and all privileges suspended until and unless their conviction is overturned by the court. So why is a former PM who is a convicted criminal enjoying these privileges? What are we teaching the young?

Chat Kechil: Indeed, the presumption of innocence should no longer apply for someone found guilty and convicted. The right of appeal is a gesture of humanity provided to a guilty person.

Newbie SC: I don't think the IGP understands what "morally wrong" means. Neither does this eccentric government. It is a case of monkey see, monkey do.

Integrity is such a dirty word for the government and all those entrusted to uphold law and justice. Laws are bent and twisted to suit their whim and fancy.

Ordinary citizens, especially the non-Malays, are treated with callousness and at times die in custody. That is how low we have sunk as a nation. - Mkini